T5's vs Halides

Does anyone have any good insight as to the difference between T5s and Halides. I currently have 2x250W HQI MH's, and with the latest electricity bill am looking into either a) getting something more nergy efficient, or b) getting a second job to pay off the Edison bill.

My main questions are this - first, can the T5s compare to the intensity of MHs, such that it can support SPS, and second, will I need to match the wattage and put in 10+ T5 bulbs in order to sufficiently light my tank, or will their efficiency limit the amount I will need. Thanks in advance, and as always I appreciate all of your experience and knowledge.
 
I posted a similar response on the following thread:
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=809172

You can achieve as much light as you need with T5's but how its configured and how much it costs will vary greatly. If you are the DIY type and already have a canopy that you can construct your own fixtures into then it will be cheaper than having to buy a whole prebuilt fixture. I personally love T5 and believe you can get great results with greater efficiency. Europeans have been showing off their all-T5 tanks for some time now and have even been featured as TOTM here. Unfortunately the initial investment could take a while to recover in energy savings, but with skyrocketing rates it sure wouldn't hurt as much on that monthly bill.
 
T5 should be OK, you woud wannt 5 or 6 bulbs to compare to the Halide.

If you run 3 of the 80watt t5 per Ice cap 660 you would push about 100watts per bulb.

You could run 4 80 watt t5 on a singe 660 and push about 400 watts, I think. that would save you 100 watts. What does 100 watts equate to in electricity bill?

How about reducing your photo period a bit?maybe you supplememt with som VHO actinic, run those 4 hours, and the MH 6 hours?
 
Also something to think about is the HEAT the tank asorbs. It is easyier to keep the tank from heating up when using t5, less chiller costs. A couple small computer fans will keep air moving across the bulbs and keep your heat down.
 
Yes, heat was certainly an issue as well, even in these winter months, and i do have fans pulling air through, but that only helps minimally. An additional issue that I have is that my tank is abnormally tall. It is 3 feet deep, so the halides have worked well at depth. Interested to know how the T5s would fare.
 
Also, where do you find the 80 W T5s? I am guessing I could only have 3 foot wide lamps, for which I have only seen 39 W bulbs. Thanks.
 
39w bulbs are regular T5, not HO. Grimreefer did a test and found that T5hos produced more PAR at depth than halides, 4 x54 T5hos vs 2 250 halides. Ice cap ballast did produce a little higher PAR but drew almost 4 times what a workhorse did and shortened bulb life by half. T5ho all the way!!
 
It all sounds good, but the 39 W version I saw in the Drs Foster & Smith catalog said they were HO. Any ideas where I may be able to find these other bulbs? Thanks
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7053373#post7053373 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bassnman11
Ice cap ballast did produce a little higher PAR but drew almost 4 times what a workhorse did and shortened bulb life by half.

Got a link for this? Just curious because Icecap claims their ballast does not affect the bulb life.
Thanks
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7053442#post7053442 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by bennyinca
Just FYI, the 39W T5HO is 3' long. The 4' T5HO is 54W, and the 5' T5HO bulb is 80W.

Thanks, thats what I thought. Whew - not completely going crazy!
 
Still looking for those links myself, but I thought it was the other way around. Thought Grim had found that bulb life was reduced only with the WH ballast when overdriven (2 bulbs doubled up). The IC ballast has a softer start which reduces bulb-end blackening, a true sign of T5 wear. As I recall his tests were all done with an inline watt meter and not based on any of the manufactures ratings. T5 HO bulbs are said to last 18 months when normally driven. I only run mine up to 12 months and have not seen any major shift in doing so.
 
Did you guys notice that the Europeans with the colorful sps tanks that are running T5 bulbs recommend changing them out ever 6 months? Not much cost savings there.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7054027#post7054027 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gcarroll
Did you guys notice that the Europeans with the colorful sps tanks that are running T5 bulbs recommend changing them out ever 6 months? Not much cost savings there.

I agree with Greg (this could be a first) I don't see how your going to save any money using T-5's...Even if you saved 5 bucks a month in power it would take you years to recoup the cost.
 
i was recently in ireland,great britain, and italy for the olympics(8 different major cities) . i found one fish store there and one restraunt with a salt tank in it over a 17 day period. maybe they arent up to date with halides yet........ :)
 
I'm not sure I do agree with the numbers even if you are replacing them every 6 months. The bulbs are much cheaper, and if I replaced my 2 metal halide bulbs with 6 T-5s The 6 new bulbs would be less than the replacement cost of one SE MH bulb. If you add in the energy savings it seems that it would certainly be cost effective over a year or two at most.
 
<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=7062783#post7062783 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by jjb81speed
i was recently in ireland,great britain, and italy for the olympics(8 different major cities) . i found one fish store there and one restraunt with a salt tank in it over a 17 day period. maybe they arent up to date with halides yet........ :)


Uhhhhh no.
 
That link doesn't really address my question, but thanks anyways. :)


Again : Any new comparisons or info comparing T5HOs (on either icecap or workhorse) with HQI MH setups ? Thanks
 

Similar threads

Back
Top